Kramdi

[TecnoGenius]

Yeah his play is besically settling for "just competent" We need to do better there, and since we don't take advantage of the extra Canadian starting with a good defensive rotation, as well as the Nationalzed American rule....then what is the point??...Time to find an impact player and stop the play-time for guys just cause they have been here for several yrs....Kramdi would not start in that position on any other team in the league

The new DNA/DNS rule is now officially a bust.  It's one step away from being dead.  This last weekend only 2 teams listed DNAs on both O/D (MTL,SSK), 2 teams listed DNAs on just D (CGY,OTT), and 4 teams didn't list any DNA at all (WPG,TOR,BC,EDM).  Since the tweet of the rule said teams *must* declare DNA on both sides, most teams have been breaking the rules all season.  And the number of teams bothering to list a DNA even on one side of the ball has been dropping week after week.

At this rate at least 5 teams will tie for those extra DPs the 2 "use it the least" teams are entitled to.  How are they going to break that tie?  What a mess.  Thanks Ambrosie and CFLPA!

[TecnoGenius]

If you can have 7 "competent" guys on your team, and 5 stars, you will do well.  A "competent" NAT at a skill position is a find.  If he progresses, that is awesome.  If his entire career is "competent", there is nothing wrong with that, at all.

Aards gets it.  A competent NAT on D is even more rare and valuable.

But you still should start 7 NAT (+1 FAKENAT), not 8.  We really should be finding an IMP SAM, with Kramdi as an excellent rotation guy and injury backup.  This may not be that important with our schedule for the next few weeks (easy peasy), but it will be when we face BC and TOR, and in the playoffs.

[theaardvark]

The new DNA/DNS rule is now officially a bust.  It's one step away from being dead.  This last weekend only 2 teams listed DNAs on both O/D (MTL,SSK), 2 teams listed DNAs on just D (CGY,OTT), and 4 teams didn't list any DNA at all (WPG,TOR,BC,EDM).  Since the tweet of the rule said teams *must* declare DNA on both sides, most teams have been breaking the rules all season.  And the number of teams bothering to list a DNA even on one side of the ball has been dropping week after week.

At this rate at least 5 teams will tie for those extra DPs the 2 "use it the least" teams are entitled to.  How are they going to break that tie?  What a mess.  Thanks Ambrosie and CFLPA!

We have no idea what the teams actually declared... we don't see that.  Those are handed to the refs... so teams may or may not have declared DNA/DNS players...

[TecnoGenius]

We have no idea what the teams actually declared... we don't see that.  Those are handed to the refs... so teams may or may not have declared DNA/DNS players...

Argh, again with the refs get secrets and the DCs provided us are just "suggestions"?  I'm not sure this would apply to the DNA/DNS stuff which every team explicitly labels in the legend of their DC?  Can't we at least trust that info? 

Maybe you're right but how are us fans supposed to follow any of this, or make any sense out of it, or have any sane discussions about it, if there's so much potentially secret chart info?

I just don't totally buy that.  What does the opposing team get to see?  The secret ref roster or the public DC?  How is an opponent supposed to prepare if they only get the public DC which you say can be all lies?  Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

[theaardvark]

Argh, again with the refs get secrets and the DCs provided us are just "suggestions"?  I'm not sure this would apply to the DNA/DNS stuff which every team explicitly labels in the legend of their DC?  Can't we at least trust that info? 

Maybe you're right but how are us fans supposed to follow any of this, or make any sense out of it, or have any sane discussions about it, if there's so much potentially secret chart info?

I just don't totally buy that.  What does the opposing team get to see?  The secret ref roster or the public DC?  How is an opponent supposed to prepare if they only get the public DC which you say can be all lies?  Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

Our DC's are set the day before, without taking into account "game time decisions" or releasing info that might be used by the opponent.  DNA/DNS might be those kinds of information, released when they mean nothing, withheld when they can mean something, and/or items that are declared last minute as the final rosters are handed to the refs pre-game.

We have no idea whether the teams are declaring DNA/DNS players, but since the league has not assessed any penalties or fines, we have to assume they do.  The logical extention of that is that they are being declared on the game time rosters handed to the officials.

Or, the league is ignoring the rule. 

I suggest the former is more likely than the later.

[Jesse]

Argh, again with the refs get secrets and the DCs provided us are just "suggestions"?  I'm not sure this would apply to the DNA/DNS stuff which every team explicitly labels in the legend of their DC?  Can't we at least trust that info? 

Maybe you're right but how are us fans supposed to follow any of this, or make any sense out of it, or have any sane discussions about it, if there's so much potentially secret chart info?

I just don't totally buy that.  What does the opposing team get to see?  The secret ref roster or the public DC?  How is an opponent supposed to prepare if they only get the public DC which you say can be all lies?  Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

First of all, no. You're not really meant to be able to follow anything. The CFL, and this incarnation of the Bombers especially, are pretty secretive and don't care about the fans knowing or following along with anything.

Second, people put way too much stock in depth charts anyways. Does it really matter who's listed as starters when, during the game, it's a pretty constant rotation of players on the field and defensive alignments? I'd be much more interested in someone putting out snap counts at the end of the game.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

First of all, no. You're not really meant to be able to follow anything. The CFL, and this incarnation of the Bombers especially, are pretty secretive and don't care about the fans knowing or following along with anything.

Second, people put way too much stock in depth charts anyways. Does it really matter who's listed as starters when, during the game, it's a pretty constant rotation of players on the field and defensive alignments? I'd be much more interested in someone putting out snap counts at the end of the game.

It's as if the entire league has decided to follow O'Shea's gameplan of obfuscation, I doubt he even looks at the other teams roster to see who's playing. 

[DM83]

What the heck does that word mean? Do I have to walk into my office and get out the dictionary? Sheesh.

[Lincoln Locomotive]

What the heck does that word mean? Do I have to walk into my office and get out the dictionary? Sheesh.

I'm guessing you are referring to the word obfuscation.....which is precisely the right word to describe what MOS tells the media....which is really nothing or unclear at best.    Politicians are masters of obfuscation when they ramble on when asked a question and never answer the question and eventually you even forget what the question  was.    MOS is a master of providing virtually nothing and still remaining amicable with the press.    He's not one to wax on and on either and is quite terse in his answers unlike politicians who like to hear the sound of their own voice.

[blue_gold_84]

What the heck does that word mean? Do I have to walk into my office and get out the dictionary? Sheesh.

It's a perfectly cromulent word.

[ModAdmin]

DM83, An instance of accismus, don't dismiss the use of such words.  They have meaning.

[Jesse]

What the heck does that word mean? Do I have to walk into my office and get out the dictionary? Sheesh.

Intentionally confusing things. Which is exactly what MOS does.

It's a perfectly cromulent word.

Nice.

[blue_or_die]

It's a perfectly cromulent word.

Very well done

[Lincoln Locomotive]

DM83, An instance of accismus, don't dismiss the use of such words.  They have meaning.

Provided of course they aren't malapropisms and used in the wrong context....

[Blue In BC]

Just saw part of the replay for the Elks game. It did look like Kramdi might have been the player that caused the turnover that Jeffcoat recovered. I'd call that a " big play " and significant to the momentum in the game.

Anyone else able to confirm what I think I saw?